Powered by TypePad

« James, We Hardly Knew Ye | Main | Fake News Watch, or, Live From The Media Cocoon »

June 14, 2017

Comments

Dave (in MA)

Bubarooni, smart phones have helped to make JOM threads barely readable anymore [but we won't mention any names].

Clarice Feldman

Here's a scenario: Mueller meets with Senate intel committee--someone (let's guess a Dem) says Coates and Rogers refused to discuss any conversations with the President, will you be asking them about that? Mueller responds yes--Asshole on the committee or staff or both phones in to the WaPo--Coates and Rogers being investigated by SC for communications with Trump.

Clarice Feldman


Michael Walsh
3 mins ·
Twitter
·
Retweeted David Burge (@iowahawkblog):
The hardest part of working at the NYTimes and WaPo is having to hit yourself in the head with a hammer every morning to induce amnesia

Clarice Feldman


Glenn Reynolds shared Marc Danziger's post.
4 mins ·

Marc Danziger
5 hrs · New York, NY ·
From a friend. I largely agree, especially wrt institutions.

"A few quick thoughts on the events of the past 24 hours, brief because there is more than enough comment out there. In no particular order:

1) As you may recall, some weeks back I took a look at the Pew data on Presidential-approval numbers by partisan identification. The bottom line is that at this point in a new Presidency, the party in power normally approves of the President by c.80%, and the party out of power approves of the President by c.30%. This historical pattern has held since the late 1980s, regardless of partisan exchanges of the White House. It has held, that is, until now: in this Presidency, the Republicans are behaving historically normal with regard to Presidential approval — but the Democrats are not. They should be hovering around c.30% approval: instead they are consistently below 10%. This is historically abnormal, and fairly well illustrates where the aberrant tendency is in our national civic life now.

2) Radicalization is a phenomenon of remarkable catholicity. If you are of a movement that is nearly unified in its enmity to the foe, if you are routinely informed that the foe is an existential threat, and if you are further informed that the foe cannot be endured or engaged, then you will radicalize. Let's be clear that this radicalization is a rational response: not moral, necessarily, but rational. Our friends on the left may wish to reflect upon that, although they largely will not.

3) This is a moment in which institutions have the potential to play a powerful and decisive mediating influence, bridging gaps among citizens and establishing the common narrative necessary for democratic civic life. Those institutions are largely absent: one need look no further than the New York Times's declaration that the Giffords shooting was motivated by rhetoric from the right (it provably was not) and that the Scalise shooting was not motivated by rhetoric from the left (it provably was). We are at the stage of Constantinopolitan Blues and Greens, and it gets worse from here.

4) The only institution retaining significant social trust in this scenario is the military, which is a terrible development for a society of liberty, especially if that institution is called upon to reinforce the infrastructure.

5) The American left is, contrary to most popular assumption, vastly more willing, experienced, and potent in the pursuit of violence than is the American right. Anyone contending otherwise likely isn't familiar with the history, or hasn't paid attention to which cohort has been developing a cadre of experienced street fighters over the past decade. Set aside the moral content of the thing: this isn't a contest we want to have, in no small part because the side with aging householders and children might not win.

This may be just a moment, a sour episode in an unhappy time. But it is more probably a harbinger. It more probably gets worse."

RattlerGator

Great post, Clarice.

Are they not capable of shame? Yes, they most certainly are. I'm not sure about their leadership, however.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame